Article: Why some researchers oppose unrestricted sharing of coronavirus data

Access, Document, Open Decision-Support, Research

Why some researchers oppose unrestricted sharing of coronavirus data

“I was up all last night,” says Nnaemeka Ndodo, a molecular bioengineer at the Nigeria Centre for Disease Control (CDC) in Abuja. He sequences coronavirus genomes during the day, and then analyses and uploads the results to an online database at night, working tirelessly alongside his colleagues. “We don’t know Saturday, we don’t know Sunday,” he says.

Researchers around the world are racing to spot variants of the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 so that they can determine whether the mutated viruses will evade vaccines or make COVID-19 deadlier. Like many scientists, Ndodo shares SARS-CoV-2 genome sequences in a popular data repository, GISAID, that requires users to sign in and to credit those whose data they analyse.

Read Full Article

Article: Making a difference with open source science equipment

Materials, Open Health, Open Manufacturing, Procedures (Medical)

Making a difference with open source science equipment

Open source lab equipment is the focus of a new study, published in Science and Public Policy. Joshua Pearce, an associate professor of materials science and engineering as well as electrical and computer engineering at Michigan Tech, led the research.

Pearce proposes that instead of spending millions of dollars every year replacing quickly obsolescent equipment, that money could be redirected to developing open source tools that are “upgradeable and transformable–they will be continuously updated” using digital manufacturing techniques such as 3-D printing.

Read Full Article

Article: Open for business: Open access journals reaching the same scientific impact as subscription journals

Access, Open Decision-Support

Open for business: Open access journals reaching the same scientific impact as subscription journals

BioMed Central’s open access journal BMC Medicine is pleased to be able to add scientific rigour to the debate about open access research, by publishing an article which compares the scientific impact of open access with traditional subscription publishing and has found that both of these publishing business models produce high quality peer reviewed articles.

The debate about who should pay for scientific publishing is of continuing importance to the scientific community but also to the general public who not only often pay for the research though charitable contributions, their taxes, and by buying products, but are also affected by the results contained within these articles.

Read Full Article